Author
Topic: Dobble's Short Run Theory (Read 2452 times)

The roulette has infinite betting selections (systems) and getting schemes. Every roulette site has a large number of designers or gold diggers. The look for the Holy Grail will never stop.In spite of this you can find a lot of interesting and beautiful systems. Most designers are no researchers and they have too less knowledge of the roulette game.In 40 years playing and researching I have developed my roulette theory. The rules for successful systems and methods are based on my theory . To judge systems ,computer simulation is indispensable.It is no shame when you do not have the knowledge of programming.I have made many analysis of systems in Excel and published on the forum. The results are mostly disappointed, because the designers have too high expectations. The goal of these research is to find changes for better.After publishing the Excel results the discussion stops and the thread ends without conclusions.

Hg was found long time ego... it's a bias play. This is exactly the reason for biggest winnings ever ( if not for all of them). How to bet , Real already told up few posts. There is no need to invent the wheel,it already has been done. What we really left with to decide is to how profit optimally in conditions that are offered to us. Progression is just a tool, incorrect use of such a tool lead to losses. Every individual case require specific progression designed for this very specific case. It's like a lock and a key... stupid to use same key for different locks.

I am an engineer and I do not beleave in bias wheels. The outcome of roulette wheels are the same as the outcome of an fair RNG, Absolute random. You live in the time far behind us. How do you find a bias wheel?

I am an engineer and I do not beleave in bias wheels. The outcome of roulette wheels are the same as the outcome of an fair RNG, Absolute random. You live in the time far behind us. How do you find a bias wheel?

Dobbelsteen,

As I recall didn't you at one time say that you were an "electrical engineer?" If so, then what on earth does that have to do with biased wheels? LOL.

Dobbelsteen, lm not engine guy. I just use to study very well at "normall" USSR school. After that lm self education maniac for a few years already... I find wheels to play collecting data and by visual observations as well, l became quite familiar with Reals method of light and shadows. No need to "belive" anything, l offer vb course ( as you probably know already) , price shouldn't be a problem for retired engineer. It gives first hand experience how to ....

Sorry to insert myself into an argument here but I must say that Dobble's Short Run Theory DOES have some merit and veteran gamblers like Pales & Harry J agree. I think Kav might even support the theory in certain ways (Kav is no simple fellow!).

I have shown that the wheel focus will change from session to session and so I also support his theory.

Reyth, nothing wrong with his theory. Short run data in specific conditions ( being offered in the moment) may very well be more valuable then long run data. It's due to averaging between conditions in long term data... This way short term ( run) is more actual and relevant, unless wheel is modeled on the long run and all variables in place are accounted. Simple example- ball change. All data is relevant for specific ball, if changed, use of previously taken data is fractional and questionable ( unless confirmed with posterior data taking)...

Certainly in your number tracking you have noticed how the statistical swings are more wild when the tracking sample is smaller, right?

Furthermore, when I reset a RNG sequence, I get a new random focus with specific features that are unique.

These things are useful.

Look, lets take a step back here for a moment and reflect....

How often do you make arguments based simply on the fact that "roulette systems can't work and only physical bias (...et. al.) works" instead of speaking specifically to the data and considering it as it is presented?

I mean don't get me wrong I am guilty of the same bias towards your posts too. Its only recently that I have begun to actually appreciate the true wisdom in the more detailed and thoughtful ones.

with an elaborate strategy with stop/loss win target playing 2 sessions of 50 spins or shorter (or little bit longer) can give different outcome than a 100 spin session. It's because you delimit yourselves the strategy to your objectives. But i agree some bad system/strategies will not give a difference after 10 sessions 100 spins or 20 sessions 50 spins; then can even get worse overall results at the end.

MrPerfect I do not discus the VB or DS methods. On VLS roulette computers are to buy. The kinematic theory for the roulette is very complex. The new generation roulette equipment has sensors to measure ball and wheel velocity and the computer regulates the slow down of the wheel. The result is manipulated. In spite of this the final outcome is random. The patents of the different roulette developers are public.

Sum opponents of the short run theory do not know what short run means. A 50 spins sample of an EC has not the same features as a 50 spins sample of a 30 number bet.